Nope, did not work indeed. I checked, and strangely, we had no Beethoven recordings by Andy Lee on the site ! I can only think he asked us to take them off (that happens now and then) and we forgot to update the pages. Anyway I have deleted these links, they don't make sense when there are no mp3's.

Now about your recording. What gorgeous sounds again ! How I wish my recordings could sound like that. Heck, half as good would be nice already...

Despite this being a musical and considered performance, there's a number of worrying flaws which you might like to address:- rhythmical inconsistencies (do count, especially in slow pieces !)- occasional overpedaling- misreadings/slips/missing notes

If you need me to be more specific I can have another listen with score tonight.

Thank you for your listening Chris. I agree that I should be closer to the score.The 32th at the first bar should be shorter, I play a 16th. The three last quarters at bar 5 are twice too fast. But in this recitativo part, the rythm is not so well defined...In the arioso, I noted one eighth missing at bar 10, two at bar 12, may be some other ones elsewhere.I will do another recording.

Last edited by Didier on Tue Aug 30, 2011 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hi Didier, I can be a little more specific right now because I've got the score in front of me. I'm sorry, but Chris is right about the rhythmical inconsistencies.

Bars 5 and 6 - I'm really don't know how to count all those repeating notes, but they are not dotted so then they should not be played in that 'long-short' manner, but instead more even. I'm not sure if I'm correct about that; maybe someone else knows.

After that the rest of the problems are in the Arioso dolente part. Specifically at bars 2, 4,5,10, and 11. If you put your metronome on to feel the pulse in a 4/4 time, you will clearly hear that in these bars you do not get the right amount of beats. Try drawing vertical lines at each beat from the RH down to the LH so you see more visually where the beats are. This helps me sometimes. Also, your last two bars - I don't get any sense of a pulse there at all and I don't see any indication that you are supposed to slow down or anything, right?

Sorry, but we'll need this fixed up before it can go up.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Bars 5 and 6 - I'm really don't know how to count all those repeating notes, but they are not dotted so then they should not be played in that 'long-short' manner, but instead more even. I'm not sure if I'm correct about that; maybe someone else knows.

This being a recitativo, I guess a performer has more leeway than usual, and maybe it need not be played exactly as written. But that dotted rhythm sounded strange to me too. Maybe there's a precedent for it ? If some pianist from the golden age did it that way, it's probably justified....

Bars 5 and 6 - I'm really don't know how to count all those repeating notes, but they are not dotted so then they should not be played in that 'long-short' manner, but instead more even. I'm not sure if I'm correct about that; maybe someone else knows.

This being a recitativo, I guess a performer has more leeway than usual, and maybe it need not be played exactly as written. But that dotted rhythm sounded strange to me too. Maybe there's a precedent for it ? If some pianist from the golden age did it that way, it's probably justified....

Yes, it would be interesting to find out for sure. I'm betting that they should not be played unevenly, though. We should get one of our Research people to check on this.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Didier,This is a very interesting movement by Beethoven; a very foreign language to the "usual" Beethoven. I have not played this sonata (I have the last, Op.111) but have studied it a bit. Personally, I think you started it too slowly, not capturing the "ma non troppo" coming after "Adagio." There is certainly flexibility to be exercised in the Recitativo (bar 4), and just the presence of a Recitativo certainly implies opera, and that not the ones we think of but rather the ones that Beethoven would think of, especially Baroque. It is impressive to observe how many directions Beethoven includes on this first page. Measure 5 (Adagio) includes a composed-out (realized) device common in the performance of Italian baroque vocal literature, specifically, a trillo ("a rapid measured tremolo on the same note, not to be confused with a trill") from the Italian vocal form known as gorgia. You can read more about this on p.26-27 (electronic on-line: p47-48) of Manfred Bukofzer's Music in the Baroque Era, http://www.scribd.com/doc/48190393/BUKOFZER-Manfred-%E2%80%A2-Music-in-the-Baroque-Era-From-Monteverdi-to-Bach-1947. My opinion, and I emphasize that's all it is, is this measure uses only slur lines except for two: 1. a tie from the flagged 32nd-note (sp. semifusa) to the beamed 32nd-note, and 2. a tie from the last beamed 32nd-note to the 8th note.

Anyway, I look forward to your next attempt. Think that you're a castrati wearing a nice wig!

Regards,Eddy

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Last edited by musical-md on Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Monica ,than you for your careful listening. I agree on missing notes in bars 2, 4 (theses ones are the ones I indicated as bars 10 and 12 with bar 1 being the first bar of what I play like in my score) and 10. I am not sure about bars 5 and 1 which seems correct to me (may be except that I speed up the tempo in bar 5 ?). Anyway I will take a lot of care for playing all the notes when redoing this recording. I do a slight rallentendo at the end, which is not noted by Beethoven, I agree. You certainly prefer the more exact, and nonetheless so beautiful rendition from Maurizio Pollini (attached).

[quote=Chris]Maybe there's a precedent for it ? If some pianist from the golden age did it that way, it's probably justified....[/quote]

I have listened so often to the live recording from Rudolf Serkin at the Vienne Konzerthaus in October 1987 (attached). A lot of notes missing here (I count 9 cells of 2 x 16th àr 32th instead of 13) but it is so moving... He was 84.

Thank you Eddy for your advice. However I do not intend to think myself as a castrato for playing this music. I missed the indication una corda at the beginning but I do not see any indication senza balle...

Last edited by Didier on Tue Aug 30, 2011 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thank you Eddy for your advice. However I do not intend to think myself as a castrato for playing this music. I missed the indication una corda at the beginning but I do not see any indication senza balle...

Ahaaa LOL Good one Didier You could maybe just play it an octave higher

I have listened so often to the live recording from Rudolf Serkin at the Vienne Konzerthaus in October 1987 (attached). A lot of notes missing here (I count 9 cells of 2 x 16th àr 32th instead of 13) but it is so moving... He was 84.

Why didn't you include similar passages with BOTH pianists? Anyway, I don't have the score in front of me, but ... <WARNING: sacrilige approaching> I must venture to say that IMO Serkin must have interpreted the slurs as ties, which is clearly wrong because Beethoven would have just simply written a 16th-note rather than 2 tied 32nd-notes in a passage (the Recitativo) where there is suspension of meter, "free" rhythm and largely the impossibility of indicating a syncopation.

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Thank you Eddy for your advice. However I do not intend to think myself as a castrato for playing this music. I missed the indication una corda at the beginning but I do not see any indication senza balle...

Ahaaa LOL Good one Didier You could maybe just play it an octave higher

You are reminding me of a joke in Spanish from when I lived on the Mexican border of Texas. It's about a dog named Sin Bolas, and a mailman to whom the dog runs. When the owner sees the dog, he shouts "Dejalo, Sin Bolas". The mailman cries out "¡NO!"

For those of you who have no clue what I'm talking about, it is probably for the best.

Thank you Eddy for your advice. However I do not intend to think myself as a castrato for playing this music. I missed the indication una corda at the beginning but I do not see any indication senza balle...

Ahaaa LOL Good one Didier You could maybe just play it an octave higher

You are reminding me of a joke in Spanish from when I lived on the Mexican border of Texas. It's about a dog named Sin Bolas, and a mailman to whom the dog runs. When the owner sees the dog, he shouts "Dejalo, Sin Bolas". The mailman cries out "¡NO!"

For those of you who have no clue what I'm talking about, it is probably for the best.

Scott

That IS FUNNY!

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Thank you Eddy for your advice. However I do not intend to think myself as a castrato for playing this music. I missed the indication una corda at the beginning but I do not see any indication senza balle...

Ahaaa LOL Good one Didier You could maybe just play it an octave higher

You are reminding me of a joke in Spanish from when I lived on the Mexican border of Texas. It's about a dog named Sin Bolas, and a mailman to whom the dog runs. When the owner sees the dog, he shouts "Dejalo, Sin Bolas". The mailman cries out "¡NO!"

For those of you who have no clue what I'm talking about, it is probably for the best.

Scott

I'm going to look that up when I get back to my office.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

here my new recording. I think the rhythm is now not too much wrong... I checked that I did not miss too many notes.

There is a long pedal indicated on the Henle score along most part of the long recitativo bar 4: only the last three chords are outside. I did it as indicated although most interprets do not it so long for avoiding the dissonance of the last RH notes.

I think this version is better on the rhythm - though there are too still many places where you get carried away and rush. The main thing that catches my ear now is the unevenness of the LH chords, and some over-generous pedaling. I did listen with score but I spotted following things:

at 0:49 there is a wrong note in the RH chord, creating a strange harmony.at 0:56 I had to laugh - you sound uncannily like a piano tuner working on an unwilling string. I don't think playing this passage like that is such a good idea.at 1:45 some of the bass notes seem to be missing.at 2:25 you play a wrong note in the RH, which makes for a strange harmony.

Sorry to be such a nitpicker. But I guess any teacher would tell you the same, and ask you to work more on it.

I play a C flat at 2'24" and an E flat at 2'25.5", which are both right. Is there a mistake in your time ?

Hmmm... I can't hear anything wrong there now. I wonder what it is I thought I heard So notewise, this is almost perfect. Rhythmically you are much more steady than a year ago or so - don't let that slip. If you now work on evenness of the chords and pedal usage (listen back to yourself very carefully) then this will be really good.

Didier, as you rerecord this movement, you might want to try for a bit more dynamic shading.

I thought that dynamic indications were mostly being observed here. But yes, it could perhaps be a bit more pronounced, as even a good recording tends to flatten out dynamics.

musicrecovery wrote:

I enjoyed your performance overall and found something very moving in your playing. Your lush tones created an emotional force in the playing.

I second that. Despite the technical issues, this is musically convincing and projects commitment and great love for the music. I hope you won't lose that quality in the process of refining your technique.

Thank you Kaila and Chris for your encouraging comments.Oh yes it is a very moving music that I do love a lot! And I am very lucky to play this piano the sound of which helps me much.

Indeed I would like to get deeper dynamics by playing quieter at some times and more progressive crescendos (except for the one of the 'tuner melody' that I could tame although I am rather happy with it in my second recording ) . However I think that I will not be able to match the dynamics of some great recordings (Pollini's one for instance), which are due to the much larger skills of the pianists of course but also, I guess, to the capabilities of their concert grand pianos.

However I think that I will not be able to match the dynamics of some great recordings (Pollini's one for instance), which are due to the much larger skills of the pianists of course but also, I guess, to the capabilities of their concert grand pianos.

And, I strongly believe, the skills of the recording engineers and editors.

I like it! Nice work Didier. It was both contemplative and dramatic at the same time. The pedaling was occasionally a bit much for me, but overall a very good performance. (I did not listen with score this time). Good work improving this!

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Thank you Eddy for your listening, moreover without score, which I take as a proof of trust !

I paid more attention to the pedalling in the Arioso dolente but may still have blurred some LH chord transitions ? I still assume the dissonance caused by the long pedal in the Recitativo, as indicated on my score although not usually maintained so long. For instance, Pollini removes it after the initial arpeggio.

Your perseverance had paid off ! This is getting better all the time. Rhythm is quite stable now, pedaling is maybe a bit over-generous but not intrusive, the LH chords are not always optimal but much more even than before. Good job, this can certainly go up on the site.

The sound is excellent! I've not really followed the development of this performance, but would like to compliment you on producing a recording which manages to capture both intimacy and Beethovenian impetuosity lurking below the surface. Very well done.

About the sound: I intended to mix two stereo tracks one from a pair of microphones in AB set up (parallel axes, ~20 cm far apart) and one from a stereo microphone operating in XY (the axes of both capsules, which close one upon the other, are orthogonal. It is what I did in my two first attempts. But I did set mistakingly both tracks in my recording software (Reaper, a very sophisticated tool although rather cheap, 50$ license for amateur use) to the same input from the XY stereo microphone. Hence what you hear is only the sound from this stereo microphone. It is a fancy one manufactured in California (where any object has to be gold-plated ): I am a bit crazy about microphones ... But I have got also cheaper microphones, especially a pair of Rode NT5 like the ones that you used for your excellent Traviata recording. You might be interested in listening what result I can get with these microphones. It is here attached, with a photo of my set up. I processed the recording in the same way like I did for my previous recording. The microphone are connected directly (no external preamp) to a RME Fireface audio interface for recording to a computer. It is professional grade hardware but I have used previously an Edirol FA-66 that achieved similar sound quality. You may find that that there is not a so large difference of sound quality difference between this recording and my previous one, which proves that my sound quality relies mostly on my piano and that your intent to get a pair of Rode NT5 is not a bad idea.

I just listened to your Beethoven. I thought it was beautifully played. Very nice.

Regarding pedaling, in the first long measure of the Recitative, there is that original pedaling indication of Beethoven calling for a very long pedal there. While it's true that the texture is relatively thin and that many notes are in the treble, still, there are passing and neighboring tones present. As a result the pedal creates quite a blur. The modern piano, as compared to Beethoven's, is far more powerful--a point needing consideration. It would be within your discretion to ignore his pedal indication and pedal it to best advantage in order to maintain clarity.

On the matter of the recitative and rhythm: I just looked at the Harvard Dictionary of Music, and found this: "The free character of the recitative has repeatedly been imitated in instrumental music." and it cites Beethoven's Op. 110 slow movement as an example. From this I believe the operating word is "free" which implies that the form is a "free recitative" (secco), not the "measured recitative" (misurato or stomentato). Because the "free" refers to a declamatory vocal style imitating and emphasizing the natural inflections of speech, this dictionary points out: "In the recitative, the purely musical principles of vocal melody, phrase, and rhythm are largely disregarded being replaced by speechlike reiteration of the same note, slight inflections, irregular rhythms, purely syllabic treatment of the text...." Given that, it would seem that you would have much leeway to take liberties with the rhythms in this Beethoven movement. But where the Admins have accepted your submission now, the point is probably moot.

David

_________________"Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities." David April

But I have got also cheaper microphones, especially a pair of Rode NT5 like the ones that you used for your excellent Traviata recording. You might be interested in listening what result I can get with these microphones. It is here attached, with a photo of my set up. I processed the recording in the same way like I did for my previous recording. The microphone are connected directly (no external preamp) to a RME Fireface audio interface for recording to a computer. It is professional grade hardware but I have used previously an Edirol FA-66 that achieved similar sound quality. You may find that that there is not a so large difference of sound quality difference between this recording and my previous one, which proves that my sound quality relies mostly on my piano and that your intent to get a pair of Rode NT5 is not a bad idea.

Thanks for uploading that; very interesting. I prefer the original recording but the Rodes seem ok. I'd have to listen on a computer with better speakers to get a definitive opinion. I found out last month that a pair of Rode NT5s were used on my Thalberg Casta diva and Martucci La forza transcription recordings (I didn't have anything to do with recording them, other than providing my Edirol recorder) - I am very happy with the sound quality on these, though it helps when you have a well-maintained Steinway Model D to play on!

thank you for your listening and your comment. I know that some pedal indications given at the time when the piano was what we call today a piano forte may not be valid for the modern piano, for instance the one for the first movement of the Moonlight sonata, but I like this one played as indicated. Indeed, I could have take more rhythmical liberties in the recitavo ; I took too many ones elsewhere in my first attempt, which may have led me to restrain myself everywhere in this one.

I think you achieved a good balance there with the freedoms of rhythms. This also informs us that Beethoven was very well familiar with musical forms before his own era, as some recitatives came from early Gregorian Chants before finding their way into oratorios and operas.

David

_________________"Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities." David April

Hi Didier,thanks for the link. I couldn´t find somehow another thread than this one, but doesn´t matter, since I have your recording now.First, all the positive things I´m used from you: very subtle and expressive playing. You have a good empathy for this piece and the sound-quality like always is first class. I especially like the "room" you give to the discant, the high notes can entirely swing out and one can breath them in metaphorically spoken.There are some minor aspects respective suggestions of improvement I have for you:1) the double dotted rhythm at the beginning is correct, but the third eigth comes too late, so that is doesn´t sound completely correct.2) the "Sextole" in bar 4 should be played rhythmically correcter, so that one can hear clearly the difference to the "Quintole" before3) Some chords you play not entirely (there are missing singular notes), so in bar 13, 16, 18, 20.4) in bar 23 the fifth chord is a-flat-major, you play minor.

1) I agree.2) The duration of my quintole (is it English ?) is 1.44 s, the one of my sextole (same question) 1.45 s. But I play the third three notes in 0.52 s and the last three ones 0.93 s. Indeed I could play this sextole more even. But it is a recitativo and slowing down at the end of the sextole is rather welcome, is'nt it ? In 1975 Pollini's version (DG), the corresponding time duration values are respectively 1.49s, 1.64s, 0.63s and 1.01s. I shall still tkink to your advice. 3) I am waiting for my piano technician on this afternoon. I intend to ask him for checking the piano action... 4) Oh my God!

Quote:

Hope you are well and I could help you a bit.

I hope that you are well too Andreas! Be sure that you help me a lot! Thank you much!

2) The duration of my quintole (is it English ?) is 1.44 s, the one of my sextole (same question) 1.45 s. But I play the third three notes in 0.52 s and the last three ones 0.93 s. Indeed I could play this sextole more even. But it is a recitativo and slowing down at the end of the sextole is rather welcome, is'nt it ? In 1975 Pollini's version (DG), the corresponding time duration values are respectively 1.49s, 1.64s, 0.63s and 1.01s. I shall still tkink to your advice.

No, in English it´s "quintuplet" and "sextuplet", at least so I could find it in "Leo Forum", I just haven´t had the time this morning to look up these two words, so I simply used the german terms. I think the rhythmically correct playing of the quintuplet and sextuplet is not the tempo respective duration you use for them, but it´s a question of making the right accents. Everyone will understand a sextuplet for example also with a rubato, if you accent the right notes. But the accents in your quintuplet and sextuplet are not clear enough. That´s the main-problem in your version.But nevertheless I find your duration-indications very interesting. That´s the advantage of our modern audio programs like WaveLabe f.ex., that we can measure such things exactly, isn´t it? I just don´t understand on what refers 1.49, 1.64 and 0.63, 1.01 exactly?

Quote:

3) I am waiting for my piano technician on this afternoon. I intend to ask him for checking the piano action...

Oh, that´s fine. But are you really sure, that the reason is just the mechanique of your piano, it should be in a very bad state if so. I think, one can play these chords also with every tone and even, if one has a not so good mechanique. (Sorry, I don´t want to insult you, it´s just my experience, during my studies I have also played on many real bad pianos.)

Quote:

I hope that you are well too Andreas! Be sure that you help me a lot! Thank you much!

Thank you, fortunately the autumn holidays have started now. I´m glad to be able to help you, my good long-standing PS-friend.

Quintolet and sextolet in French. Quintuplet and sextuplet are French but used in mathematics.

Quote:

I just don´t understand on what refers 1.49, 1.64 and 0.63, 1.01 exactly?

1.49s is the duration of the quintuplet, 1.64s is the duration of the sextuplet, 0.63s is the duration of the first three notes of the sextuplet and 0.63s the duration of the last three notes of the sextuplet (1.64 = 0.63 + 1.01).

I think that my two last notes in the sextolet are too loud. After editing (it's just for illustration ), it sounds better, although not as good as Pollini of course:

Oh, thanks for that interesting illustration. I like such studies. I think, the main difference between your version and Pollinis is, that Pollini plays the notes of the quintuplet and the sextuplet rhythmically just more even than you do. I mean the duration between the notes within the quintuplet respective the sextuplet is all the same, whereas in your version the duration between the notes is not even. And the accent has to be clearly on the first note of each figure. That normally includes also, that in the sextuplet you have to play the notes faster than in the quintuplet, but not, if you want to make a ritenuto respective rubato within the sextuplet, of course.It also was very interesting, how you have edited the volume of the last notes. If I try to do such things one always hears my editing, so I have given it up.

I just finally had a chance to listen to this version (I missed #2). This is a very enjoyable performance. As has been noted, it is rhythmically much tighter. I personally did not find the amount of pedal to be terribly intrusive. It creates a somewhat cathedral-like atmosphere around the music.

I had the chance to listen to your Beethoven piece and you play quite well IMO. I have a penchant for pieces that are downtempo so this was a treat. For criticism I thought you could have altered the dynamics a bit more, but overall not bad performance at all.

Nice to hear your interpretation,

~Riley

_________________"I don't know what music is, but I know it when I hear it." - Alan SchuylerRiley Tucker

thank you for your comment. I agree that still more contrasted dynamics would be nice. I did not use the soft pedal in the arioso dolente because of the notation tutte le corde at its beginning as opposed to una corda at the beginning of the movement. However I might have use it here and there for getting quieter pianissimi ?Anyway I have to cope with my own limitation as pianist: if I would have play quieter, still more notes would have not sound (see Andreas post), and with the limitation from my piano that although being an excellent 7' grand doest not have the dynamic capability of a concert grand.The technician who uses to maintain my piano told me that the action setting was right. He could make easier the pianissimi by making shorter the free run of the hammers before they hit the strings but the key run would have to be deeper, which would make the action less reactive. Cheers,Didier

I believe the key to good pianissimi is to raise the general loudness of your playing. I used to be a very timid player, playing everything mf or mp. The first thing I was told when I started lessons again was that I was playing too wimpy and softly. Had some trouble getting my head around that at first... but By Jove she was right. Having finally acquired a much firmer touch and fuller volume I find it much easier to drop to piano and pianissimo. Having said that, the instrument must also be suited to it. I think the larger the instrument, and the lighter the action, the better you can create good dynamic contrasts.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum